Viktoria F Koehler1, Pia Adam2, Karin Frank-Raue3, Friedhelm Raue4, Elke Berg1, Eva Hoster3, Stephanie Allelein5, Matthias Schott5, Matthias Kroiss2,6, Christine Spitzweg1,7. 1. Department of Internal Medicine IV, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany. 2. Division of Endocrinology/Diabetology, Department of Internal Medicine I; University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany. 3. Institute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany. 4. Private Practice of Endocrinology and Nuclear Medicine, Heidelberg, Germany. 5. Division for Specific Endocrinology, Medical Faculty, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany. 6. Comprehensive Cancer Center Mainfranken, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany. 7. Adjunct Academic Appointment, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, Metabolism and Nutrition, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Abstract
Background: Management of patients with advanced medullary thyroid cancer (MTC) remains a therapeutic challenge. The multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) vandetanib and cabozantinib have been approved for the treatment of progressive MTC based on prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in phase 3 clinical trials. Patients and Methods: To evaluate clinical characteristics, treatment regimens, efficacy, and treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of vandetanib and cabozantinib in MTC patients outside clinical trials at four German tertiary care centers. Forty-eight patients diagnosed between 1990 and 2018 were included. PFS and overall survival (OS) probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Results: The median age at diagnosis was 46 years (15-80 years); a germ line RET (rearranged during transfection) mutation was known in 6 (13%) patients. Thirty-two (67%) patients showed progressive disease before TKI initiation. Forty-seven (98%) patients were treated with vandetanib and 23 (48%) patients with cabozantinib. Vandetanib was first-line treatment in 41 (85%) patients and cabozantinib in 7 (15%) patients. Partial response was the best response in 12 (26%) patients treated with vandetanib and in 5 (22%) patients treated with cabozantinib. Sixteen (34%) patients treated with vandetanib and 3 (13%) patients treated with cabozantinib had stable disease ≥24 weeks. The median PFS for vandetanib and cabozantinib was 17 months [95% confidence interval, CI, 9.3-24.6 months] and 4 months [CI 3.1-4.9 months], respectively. The 6- and 12-month survival rates were 98% and 86% for vandetanib and 78% and 70% for cabozantinib, respectively. The median OS for vandetanib and cabozantinib was 53 months [CI 43.7-62.3 months] and 24 months [CI 5.9-42.1 months], respectively. In vandetanib-treated patients, the PFS and OS were significantly longer in patients aged ≤60 years at TKI initiation and in patients with ≥5 TEAEs. Additionally, the PFS was longer in the absence of bone metastases. In cabozantinib-treated patients, the PFS was significantly longer in patients experiencing TEAEs and in patients aged ≤60 years, and the OS was significantly longer in patients who had TEAEs and in patients with ≥5 TEAEs. Conclusions: Vandetanib and cabozantinib are effective treatment options in the majority of MTC patients. We hypothesize that the poorer prognosis of cabozantinib-treated patients in our retrospective analysis is most likely due to its use as second-line treatment after treatment failure on vandetanib. However, different degrees of efficacy of the two drugs are possible.
Background: Management of patients with advanced medullary thyroid cancer (MTC) remains a therapeutic challenge. The multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) vandetanib and cabozantinib have been approved for the treatment of progressive MTC based on prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in phase 3 clinical trials. Patients and Methods: To evaluate clinical characteristics, treatment regimens, efficacy, and treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of vandetanib and cabozantinib in MTC patients outside clinical trials at four German tertiary care centers. Forty-eight patients diagnosed between 1990 and 2018 were included. PFS and overall survival (OS) probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Results: The median age at diagnosis was 46 years (15-80 years); a germ line RET (rearranged during transfection) mutation was known in 6 (13%) patients. Thirty-two (67%) patients showed progressive disease before TKI initiation. Forty-seven (98%) patients were treated with vandetanib and 23 (48%) patients with cabozantinib. Vandetanib was first-line treatment in 41 (85%) patients and cabozantinib in 7 (15%) patients. Partial response was the best response in 12 (26%) patients treated with vandetanib and in 5 (22%) patients treated with cabozantinib. Sixteen (34%) patients treated with vandetanib and 3 (13%) patients treated with cabozantinib had stable disease ≥24 weeks. The median PFS for vandetanib and cabozantinib was 17 months [95% confidence interval, CI, 9.3-24.6 months] and 4 months [CI 3.1-4.9 months], respectively. The 6- and 12-month survival rates were 98% and 86% for vandetanib and 78% and 70% for cabozantinib, respectively. The median OS for vandetanib and cabozantinib was 53 months [CI 43.7-62.3 months] and 24 months [CI 5.9-42.1 months], respectively. In vandetanib-treated patients, the PFS and OS were significantly longer in patients aged ≤60 years at TKI initiation and in patients with ≥5 TEAEs. Additionally, the PFS was longer in the absence of bone metastases. In cabozantinib-treated patients, the PFS was significantly longer in patients experiencing TEAEs and in patients aged ≤60 years, and the OS was significantly longer in patients who had TEAEs and in patients with ≥5 TEAEs. Conclusions: Vandetanib and cabozantinib are effective treatment options in the majority of MTC patients. We hypothesize that the poorer prognosis of cabozantinib-treated patients in our retrospective analysis is most likely due to its use as second-line treatment after treatment failure on vandetanib. However, different degrees of efficacy of the two drugs are possible.
Authors: A Matrone; A Prete; A Nervo; A Ragni; L Agate; E Molinaro; C Giani; L Valerio; E Minaldi; A Piovesan; R Elisei Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2021-02-17 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: G Lisco; A De Tullio; E Jirillo; V A Giagulli; G De Pergola; E Guastamacchia; V Triggiani Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2021-03-25 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Anna Angelousi; Aimee R Hayes; Eleftherios Chatzellis; Gregory A Kaltsas; Ashley B Grossman Journal: Endocr Relat Cancer Date: 2022-05-31 Impact factor: 5.900